ABSTRACT “THE COLONIAL CHURCH AND ITS LEGACY AND IMPACT ON COLONIAL DIOCESES, FOCUSING ON THE DIOCESE OF SOUTHERN VIRGINIA: A FAMILY SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE” GARY W. BUTTERWORTH Project under the direction of The Rt. Rev. Joe Goodwin Burnett Edwin Friedman writes, “I have been struck by how families, corporations, [churches, synagogues] and other kinds of institutions are constantly trying to cure their own ills through amputations . As a priest ordained in Southern Virginia, I have often thought of this reality and wanted to gain a better understanding of the history of the Church in Virginia and what are the historical reasons for the dysfunction that seems to be in the Diocesan DNA. Here are two initial questions: What impact does the Colonial Church have on the current workings, attitudes, and ecclesial developments of the Diocese of Southern Virginia and could there be particular dimensions of family systems theory— particularly as articulated in the work of Edwin Friedman—that shed light on what appear to be some longstanding dysfunctional patterns that negatively impact the role and office of bishop? It is understood that the American Revolution was an instrumental event in the decline of the established church in early America, and especially in Virginia. However, what else was going on that contributed to the decline? Was it the powerful privileged gentry class that ruled the vestries, the chaotic political situation in England, the inadequate response to evangelicalism, the tie to the monarchy in England, the lack of educated clergy, the lack of bishops in America, a compilation of all of these, or was it something else? This paper attempts to explore a deeper understanding and appreciation of the impact of the Colonial Church and its legacy, and the way in which it continues to manifest itself within the family system of Southern Virginia as well as any diocese with Colonial Church roots. This author believes that this single understanding could well be the most important pre-requisite for an incoming bishop in a Colonial diocese. When such a diocese and their new bishop do not know or understand these deeply rooted patterns, a “secret” stays alive in the system, and it is only a matter of time before it begs to come out and wreak havoc with future generations. i It is not only necessary to understand the ramifications of living in an institution with roots in the Colonial Church, but just as important is to address how we may be able to usher it out the door. Approved Date Advisor Date Second Advisor ii THE COLONIAL CHURCH AND ITS LEGACY AND IMPACT ON COLONIAL DIOCESES, FOCUSING ON THE DIOCESE OF SOUTHERN VIRGINIA: A FAMILY SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE by Gary W. Butterworth Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology of the University of the South in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Ministry May, 2013 Sewanee, Tennessee Approved Date Advisor Date Second Advisor TABLE OF CONTENTS PROLOGUE……………………………………………………………………………… 1 CHAPTERS 1. INTRODUCTION………………………….……………………………….......4 a. Setting the stage, the context, the culture 2. THE COLONIAL CHURCH………… ………………………………………10 a. The Early Virginia Church b. The impact of the Vestry c. The impact of the chaotic political situation in England d. The impact of the Evangelical Movement e. The impact of the uneducated clergy f. The impact of the lack of local bishops g. The impact of the Revolutionary War and post war period h. The impact of the above on The Diocese of Southern Virginia 3. THE IDENTIFIED PATIENT & FAMILY SYSTEMS…………….………...52 a. What is an identified patient b. How does one become an identified patient c. How might this (the identified patient) be manifested in churches, dioceses, and the wider church? 4. UNDERSTANDING THE COLONIAL CHURCH FROM A FAMILY SYSTEMS PERSPECTIVE………………………………………………….......65 5. CONCLUSION……………….…………………………………………….88 WORKS CITED………………………………………………………………………….96 Appendix 1 Diocesan Organization Committee Report (DOSV) Appendix 2 Report of the three Bishops appointed to consult with the Diocese of Southern Virginia October 17, 2005 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many individuals who were key players in ensuring the success of this endeavor. First, I would like to thank my wife Christina whose life as a “Navy Wife” was nothing compared to the challenges of being a priests wife. Her love, sacrifice, and support saw me through this endeavor. A huge “shout out” of thanks goes to The Rt. Rev. Joseph Burnett, who served as my first reader and advisor. His knowledge of family systems and his willingness to give tremendous amounts of time and expertise are appreciated more than anyone can imagine. I am also indebted to The Rev. Dr. James Turrell who served as my second reader. His guidance and leadership throughout my formative seminary years as well as in the DMin process has been enjoyable and invaluable. A closing note of thanks goes to all the churches I served while pursuing my DMin.: St. John’s Episcopal, Halifax, VA; Emmanuel Episcopal, Halifax, VA; Trinity Episcopal, South Boston, VA; and All Saints Episcopal, Gastonia, NC. Their support and encouragement were tantamount to the success of this project. Last, but not least, I thank the Diocese of Southern Virginia for their support during this project. This project could not have been accomplished without it. We are all affected by forces, social and natural, that in some measure determine our behavior without our being able to bring to bear upon them our private will, however great or righteous it may be. -Howard Thurman, Jesus and the Disinherited PROLOGUE During seminary I was blessed with the opportunity to do a month-long field education immersion at St. John’s Episcopal Church (formerly known as Chuckatuck Parish), located in Suffolk, Virginia. This parish traces its roots to 1642 when the area was divided into three parishes: Upper, Lower, and Chuckatuck. In 1640, a man named Percival Champion donated 450 acres to the Church around the area of Lower Parish. A church was built on the land of Lower Parish, called the glebe, in about 1643. In 1725, Lower Parish and Chuckatuck Parish joined as Suffolk Parish because they were separately unable to financially support a minister. The Bishop of London assigned a loyalist Parson, John Agnew, to this parish in 1754. When the trouble with Great Britain began, Parson Agnew, who was a zealous supporter of the British cause and open in his condemnation of the growing spirit of independence in the colonies urged all to attend church on a particular Sunday. That Sunday, the church was full and a large crowd stood outside the church listening through the open windows. The topic of Parson Agnew's sermon was “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's,” he proceeded to denounce the sins of disloyalty and rebellion. In the middle of the sermon William Cowper, a vestryman and magistrate, left his seat in the pew and mounting the pulpit, ordered Parson Agnew to sit down. “I am doing my Master's business,” said the Parson; Cowper replied “Which Master? Your Master in heaven or your Master over the seas? You must leave the church or I will use force.” “I 1 will never be the cause of breeding riot in my Master's house,” responded Parson Agnew. He stepped down from the pulpit, walked through the crowd to his carriage, and drove away. This was the first open defiance of the British Crown on the south side of the James River.1 When the Glebe Act of 1802 took effect, the Overseers of the Poor in Suffolk attempted to confiscate the glebe land of Suffolk Parish. In 1817, Reverend Jacob Keeling argued successfully in the courts that the land was a gift from a private individual and the original glebe land is still in possession of the two churches that used to make up Suffolk Parish, St. John’s and Glebe Church, Suffolk. The glebe land is currently used in the same manner as it was originally used in colonial times. The parishes split the income from the land, which is worked by a local farmer. The income from the glebe provides approximately ten to fifteen percent of the operating budget of both churches. This experience, and the particular history of this region, took on new meaning for me in the light of my more recent involvement in the wider church. In 2006 I attended the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church where I worked as a volunteer and served as an exhibit booth assistant for Sewanee. I also served as a Deputy for the 76th General Convention in 2009, and was elected as a Deputy for the 77th General Convention but could not serve due to the acceptance of a new call in a different diocese. During this time, I became aware of the organization of the Episcopal Church, especially in its General Convention, House of Deputies, and House of Bishops Secretariats. I dealt 1 History of Suffolk Parish. Taken from Original Vestry Books of 18th Century Suffolk Parish, currently St. John’s, Suffolk and Glebe Church, Suffolk. 2 with bishops and deputies, submitting resolutions and tracking their progress, and through this I gained valuable insight into the legislative workings of the church. Observing various committees at work as they discussed changes to the prayer book and other liturgical resources, as well as dealing with the Windsor resolutions and other important issues, enabled me to gain a better understanding of the wide diversity of the church. I saw firsthand how faithful and passionate Christians can disagree with one another, and yet serve in a spirit of mutual admiration and love. Being present at convention for the election of the first female Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, was a powerful witness as well.